The Internet Society has noted with concern a number of U.S. legislative proposals that would mandate DNS blocking and filtering by ISPs in order to protect the interests of copyright holders. We agree with proponents of the Protect-IP Act (PIPA) and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) that combating illegal online activities is a very important public policy objective. However, policies that are enacted to achieve this goal must not undermine the viability of the Internet as a globally reachable platform. After close examination and consultation with the Internet community, we do not believe that the current U.S. legislative proposals are consistent with these basic principles.

In particular, we are concerned with provisions in both laws regarding DNS filtering. DNS filtering is often proposed as a way to block illegal content consumption by end users. Yet policies to mandate DNS filtering have not proven to be effective – these approaches interfere with cross-border data flows and services undermining innovation and social development across the globe. In addition, DNS blocking raises significant concerns with respect to human rights and freedom of expression and may curtail fundamental international principles of rule of law and due process.

The United States has an important leadership role when it comes to online Internet freedoms and should show the way when it comes to balancing local responsibilities and global impact, especially with respect to Internet policy.

In short, the negative impact of DNS filtering far outweighs any short-term, narrow, legal, and commercial benefits. The Internet Society believes that sustained, global collaboration amongst all parties is needed to find ways that protect the global architecture of the Internet while combating illegal online activities. We must all work to support the principles of innovation and freedom of expression upon which the Internet was founded.

The report [pdf] “explores key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet”. It covers both content and access, and also examines what “exceptional circumstances under which the dissemination of certain types of information may be restricted”.

The report states:

States restrict, control, manipulate and censor content disseminated via the Internet without any legal basis, or on the basis of broad and ambiguous laws, without justifying the purpose of such actions; and/or in a manner that is clearly unnecessary and/or disproportionate to achieving the intended aim

and

The Special Rapporteur is of the view that the arbitrary use of criminal law to sanction legitimate expression constitutes one of the gravest forms of restriction to the right, as it not only creates a “chilling effect”, but also leads to other human rights violations, such as arbitrary detention and torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Noting recent cases of imprisonment of bloggers, the report suggests that defamation be decriminalized globally and that only incitements to violence can be legitimately blocked. Additionally

the Special Rapporteur reiterates that the right to freedom of expression includes expression of views and opinions that offend, shock or disturb.

The report criticizes heavy-handed copyright protection schemes while noting that the most recent drafts of the ACTA agreement have dropped the ‘3 strike’ disconnection provisions.

It calls for universal access noting that a BBC global poll in March 2010 “79% of those interviewed
in 26 countries believe that Internet access is a fundamental human right”

Rob Faris, the OpenNet Initiative’s Research Director and John Palfrey, one of the project’s Principal Investigators, lead a discussion of Internet filtering and provided a glimpse of the results of ONI’s first global survey of Internet censorship.

In the last year ONI has studied forty countries and found a substantial increase in Internet censorship, colored by complex and dynamic political, legal and social processes. The research will be documented in the forthcoming MIT Press book: Access Denied: the Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering.

The OpenNet Initiative is a partnership between the Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, the Advanced Network Research Group at the Cambridge Security Programme at Cambridge University, and the Oxford Internet Institute at the University of Oxford.